Birth of Archie Harrison Mountbatten-Windsor: May 6, 2019

[Gawin]

Yes, and Anne's situation is completely different as titles are passed on in male-line. So, Mark and Anne were very consistent in their decision: no title for Mark and therefore no titles for Peter and Zara.

Harry and Meghan are inconsistent: please give us a ducal, earl and baron title; in turn we will make it known that our children should NOT be addressed as children of a duke.

I suppose it's possible they really didn't want a ducal or any title and simply went along with the Queen's wishes.

 

[jacqui24]

It's a bit different--Anne is the Queen's only daughter, Harry is one of her 4 grandsons. A photo of the Queen with her daughter and grandchild would quite usual.

I was talking about the concept of presenting the baby.

The press captured Anne leaving the hospital; that's different from organizing a limited photocall within (the grounds of) Windsor Castle.

That was as close to a photocall as it gets with babies those days. And certainly, we have photos from their christenings as well. That doesn’t negate they are private citizens.

I guess I just don’t see the big deal about a baby not using a courtesy title. He’ll one day be The Duke of Sussex, but it likely won’t be years down the line when he’s already an adult. And really, I don’t know how much a difference it’ll be as he’ll have to carve out a career of his own anyways.

 

[Frelinghighness]

Princess Anne accepted the additional titel of princess royal which many poster did not know. She did not reject titles for herself, just her children.
As far as Harry’s children, he is a royal duke and his children will be styled lords and ladies. Also, do not kill the goose that laid the golden egg, no matter if your mother was Diana, whom I adored

 

[Mbruno]

They both look at the issue from a purely legal point of view, not rank or precedence so it's really a very technical distinction. *Technically* anyone in the UK who isn't the Sovereign or a Peer is a commoner. While the "privilege of peerage" has diminished and is (as far as I can tell) practically meaningless it still exists:

See "Privilege of Peerage"
https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld/ldcomp/compso2010/ldctso15.htm#note530

Yes, the title of Prince(ess) can be granted by LP (just as Peerage titles are) but the recipient of the princely title doesn't gain any special *legal* rights (however diminished & meaningless they may be).

Well, the Oxford dictionaries disagree and define a commoner as anyone “ who is not from a royal or noble family”. For the Cambridge dictionary, a commoner is simply someone “ who is not of high social rank”.

Saying that a commoner is someone who can take a seat in the House of Commons is a completely arbitrary definition, not least because, as I said, hereditary peers can now be members of the House of Commons too. Conversely, there are non-peers like the bishops who are members of the House of Lords and cannot sit in the Commons.

The OP’s pseudo-technicality confuses classes of membership in the UK Parliament ( Sovereign, Lords and Commons) with social ranks, which is what royalty, nobility and commoners are by definition.

 

[Curryong]

And on the front page of all UK papers today is...baby Archie!

https://twitter.com/x/status/1126244976357269507

 

[PtahHotep]

They look lovely. All of them. Charming family. Hideous name. When some guessed Alvin, I though ugh. Now, I am a fan of Alvin. Cannot know what they are thinking about.

I totally disagree.
Alvin............seriously?????????

He would get tormented for the rest of his life with chipmunk jokes and people singing to his face "Christmas, Christmas, don't be late" and other such songs.

Alvin and the Chipmunks (I'm sure) is shown in the US.

So.

That would be a bad choice.

Archie was born on George Clooney’s birthday, and my husband just pointed out that the character Clooney played in Three Kings was Archie.

Just a thought. ?

He also played a character named Archie Gates in an action movie in 1997 with Nicole Kidman.

Whoa.

Weird.

 

[Kaatje]

I am partial to the name Arthur, it was my grandfather’s and is my son’s name, but I assumed they wouldn’t use it due to it being the name of Pippa’s son. I know there is no relation, but it’s still a close tie. That being said, I adore the name Archie! The photograph with the Queen and the DoE is fabulous. The great-grandparents look absolutely besotted.

 

[Osipi]

Actually, the keyword for *any* title or style that Archie could use is defined by the word "courtesy". As in *allowed*. Harry and Meghan, the Queen and Charles have all agree to *not* allow that courtesy. Simple.

Mom and Dad prefer Master. The Queen approves Master. Charles approves Master. We'll have to wait until Archie himself approves or not. Simple.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Well, the Oxford dictionaries disagree and define a commoner as anyone “ who is not from a royal or noble family”. For the Cambridge dictionary, a commoner is simply someone “ who is not of high social rank”.

Saying that a commoner is someone who can take a seat in the House of Commons is a completely arbitrary definition, not least because, as I said, hereditary peers can now be members of the House of Commons too. Conversely, there are non-peers like the bishops who are members of the House of Lords and cannot sit in the Commons.

The OP’s pseudo-technicality confuses classes of membership in the UK Parliament ( Sovereign, Lords and Commons) with social ranks, which is what royalty, nobility and commoners are by definition.

The Bishops are Lords thought - the Lords Spiritual.

The House of Lords is the House of the Lords Spiritual and the Lords Temporal.

You are assuming that I don't know what I am talking about - I do. I come from a noble family and grew up with this as a day to day understanding of the terminology - not from a dictionary but from the family and their teachings of the terms.

 

[Countessmeout]

Master Archie Mountbatten-Windsor already has an article on Wikipedia.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Archie_Mountbatten-Windsor

He had his own page since the day he was born, the title just changed when his name was given. Same with all royal babies.

Well, the Oxford dictionaries disagree and define a commoner as anyone “ who is not from a royal or noble family”. For the Cambridge dictionary, a commoner is simply someone “ who is not of high social rank”.

Saying that a commoner is someone who can take a seat in the House of Commons is a completely arbitrary definition, not least because, as I said, hereditary peers can now be members of the House of Commons too. Conversely, there are non-peers like the bishops who are members of the House of Lords and cannot sit in the Commons.

The OP’s pseudo-technicality confuses classes of membership in the UK Parliament ( Sovereign, Lords and Commons) with social ranks, which is what royalty, nobility and commoners are by definition.

The dictionary is a 'technical' definition that applies to any country.

Different countries have different concepts.

In the UK there are three levels of society

1. Sovereign
2. peers
3. commoners


So any member of the royal family who doesn't hold a peerage in their own right, is by definition in the UK, a commoner. Harry and William were commoners until the day they were married.

'Royals' are not their own rank. They fall within one of the other ranks.

 

[Abbigail]

William would be consulted because Harry's children will fall under his reign.

Maybe William doesn't want his nephew to be a HRH.

I'm sorry but no, I don't believe William would have been consulted at all. Decisions like this are likely discussed between the Queen, Charles and the parents. No one else.

Was I surprised that they named the baby Archie? Yes. And I'm not crazy about it but I'm sure I will warm to it eventually. I'm even more surprised by no courtesy title. Then again, it is just a courtesy title. They have not proclaimed that Archie will never be known as Duke of Sussex or HRH, so I'm baffled by some of the outrage here. He is just a baby now so I don't think it really matters and unless something changes, he will be Prince Archie when his grandfather is king.

Baby Archie is a total cutie, by the way! I love the pics with his glowing parents and then later with granny Doria, the Queen and DoE. A shame such great moments are getting lost in a bunch of speculation.

 

[Cocoasneeze]

I like the name Archie Harrison. It's personable, unexpected, and seems to suit the baby and the family.
That picture of The Queen, DoE, Doria, Meghan, Harry and Archie is an absolute dream. Such a warm, meaningful, candid moment captured by the photographer. I love it.

I've been trying to read through the past pages, and just don't get what people are upset about. Meghan and Harry chose for their child not to use any titles. Their choice, and I just don't get why there's such an opposition to it. But then again, there seems to be outrage over almost anything they do.

 

[Friedrich Karl II]

Archie as first nime was big surprise and I have still some difficulties get over that. I expected some more traditional name like David, James or Albert. I know that there is some history behind of name but it seems still bit unusual for royal.

 

[Osipi]

So we were all thinking of royal names and traditional names. What better way to make one's child absolutely unique unto himself? You unique slyly on the public and throw them for a total loop.

It reminds me in a way of Michael Phelps actually naming his first born son Boomer. (yeps.. that's his legal first name). We can try and figure out where Archie came from but the beauty is that we'll never know really unless Harry and Meghan tell us.

I think I'm going to like watching Archie grow.

 

[Abbigail]

I would have been quite pleased with a name like Alexander Harrison or Archie as a middle name with just about any other name as his first. But hey, the parents love it and if Archie turns out to have as much charm and personality as his father, his name just might be a plus.

 

[PtahHotep]

So we were all thinking of royal names and traditional names. What better way to make one's child absolutely unique unto himself? You unique slyly on the public and throw them for a total loop.

It reminds me in a way of Michael Phelps actually naming his first born son Boomer. (yeps.. that's his legal first name). We can try and figure out where Archie came from but the beauty is that we'll never know really unless Harry and Meghan tell us.

I think I'm going to like watching Archie grow.

It seems (according to a hunch a poster came up with some pages ago)this may have been related to George saying his name was Archie (!). Either he heard Harry and Meghan discussing it and appropriated it for himself or else he came up with it himself and H and M heard it and decided to use it for their baby.

NOT the first time this has happened. Minnie Driver was born AMELIA Driver but her 4-year old (like George) big sister could not pronounce AMELIA but just kept calling her Minnie over and over.

She laughs now and says her destiny was decided by a 4-year old. That is just one example.

Like the other poster said....would not be surprised if George was somehow involved in this.

Other sites have also speculated this.
Stranger things have happened.

 

[rmay286]

I must say a bit disappointed to say the least in the name. Of all the great royal and family names, I thought they would have picked something. I was hoping something unexpected from the three but not like this. And if they went for an unique name, I expected at least a few family names in the middle.

Archie is actually kind of cute. But I hate names that sound like nicknames. Its cute for a kid but as an adult? My Uncle named his son Jimmy (not James or even Jim like him) but Jimmy. Cute for a little boy, not so much for when he is an adult. I guess he can just shorten it to Jim.

Harrison is not just a surname. Its been a common first name for decades. It literally means son of Harry, so at least that makes sense.

Archie is a cute baby for sure. But I was surprised by the name too. I suppose I thought there would be at least one traditional name in there.

Sorry but I really don't like Archie, in general, and also because it does sound like a kids' name rather than an adult name.

Harrison was a clever idea though! Especially since most of the Harrison's out there these days really aren't "Harry's son," this was a pretty creative idea.

 

[PtahHotep]

I'm sorry but no, I don't believe William would have been consulted at all. Decisions like this are likely discussed between the Queen, Charles and the parents. No one else.

Was I surprised that they named the baby Archie? Yes. And I'm not crazy about it but I'm sure I will warm to it eventually. I'm even more surprised by no courtesy title. Then again, it is just a courtesy title. They have not proclaimed that Archie will never be known as Duke of Sussex or HRH, so I'm baffled by some of the outrage here. He is just a baby now so I don't think it really matters and unless something changes, he will be Prince Archie when his grandfather is king.

Baby Archie is a total cutie, by the way! I love the pics with his glowing parents and then later with granny Doria, the Queen and DoE. A shame such great moments are getting lost in a bunch of speculation.

Archie is approachable; more democratic and open, unlike it's longer version, which is more remote and stuffy.

IMO, at least.

Archie is a cute baby for sure. But I was surprised by the name too. I suppose I thought there would be at least one traditional name in there.

Sorry but I really don't like Archie, in general, and also because it does sound like a kids' name rather than an adult name.

Harrison was a clever idea though! Especially since most of the Harrison's out there these days really aren't "Harry's son," this was a pretty creative idea.

Archie Moore, the boxer of decades ago; Archie Bunker (yes, irony, LOL).....etc., etc...........do those sound kid-like? Even Archie Andrews sounds more like a youthful man than a child.

So yes, I disagree with you. To each their own, though. My opinion, ultimately.

 

[AnnaNotherThing]

OK it has finally dawned on me why something about using "Harrison" bugged me. With all Meghan has spoken of feminist rhetoric, challenging the patriarchy and the personal sacrifices she has made to marry Harry seems like a strange step to highlight the fact that Harrison was used because he's Harry's son.

Wouldn't a name highlighting her contribution as mother, birther, female, newcomer, outsider be more suitable? Of course he's Harry's son, he will live a easy life, free from mortal cares and concerns and will carry the Mountbatten-Windsor surname or Sussex if he wishes.

Yes, Megson or Markson sound odd but surely Meghan could have put a more personal touch with a name that meant something to her instead of another deferrment to the larger entity.

Maybe I am just reading too much into this? ��

 

[RJC]

It's a bit like the names of your grandchildren - you may not necessarily have chosen the same name as your kids, but you grow to love it and the child/ren regardless.

 

[Fem]

BTW, it's Master Archie, not Mister.

'Master' and 'Mister' are the same thing - the only difference is that 'Master' is used with children. So when Archie grows up, he'll be known asMr. Archie Mountbatten-Windsor (if nothing changes, of course, but my point is, these are the same term just used with different age groups).

I will look forward to Sussexes' Christmas card in the future as I think that'll be mostly the only time we see little Archie. I saw a baby with brown hair with red hue one time (mom has firey red hair, and dad has brown hair), and it was the most beautiful hair color under the sun. I hope we see it. This is the only time I will be pissed if the Sussexes want to send out black and white photos, when I want to see their son's hair color.

I thought so too - that we won't see the child much if at all. But now I'm starting to slowly doubt it. Leaving behind a fact that I can't imagine Harry leaving his bundle of joy for a few week long royal tour means we could see a glimps of little Archie here and there, but also their behavior since the birth. I think the whole "we want privacy" was a bit blown out of proportion by the fandom and the press. Not only we got a photocall with a baby, which also included answering a few question that William didn't do after George, but also a picture with the Queen and DoE, so that's another extra bit we don't get with Cambridge children.

I'm begining to suspect it's more "we will do things our way" than "we'll keep the child completely private". I bet we'll get pictures from Christening, that in a year or two (maybe two) we'll see little Archie on the balcony during Trooping the colour and I wouldn't exclude the posibility we'll get birthday pictures too.

 

[Duc_et_Pair]

I doubt that would be the reasoning. Some royals like Andrew always use their senior title. If it really was a concern, and Harry didn't want confusion, Archie could be Lord Archie or he could be Baron Kilkeel.

No Baron Kilkeel. That will be for Archie's son.

See:

HRH Prince Edward, 2nd Duke of Kent, 2nd Earl of St Andrews, 2nd Baron Downpatrick
George Windsor, Earl of St Andrews
Edward Windsor, Lord Downpatrick

So a future Baron Kilkeel is the same scheme:

HRH Prince Henry, 1st Duke of Sussex, 1st Earl of Dumbarton, 1st Baron Kilkeel
Archie Mountbatten-Windsor, Earl of Dumbarton
[Name] Mountbatten-Windsor, Lord Kilkeel

 

[King of the Jungle]

Archie is cute. It's kindly, informal and quite popular in Australia.
The handsome Cary Grant was born Archibald (called Archie)
Harrison is a super surprise. I didn't know surnames were able to be used.

 

[Iluvbertie]

Harrison is often used as a first name these days. I had a number of Harrisons in my high school classes this year - 3 in Year 10 (15 year olds), 2 in Year 9 (14 year olds) and 3 in Year 7 (11 - 12 year olds).

It has been one of the most popular names at my school for the past 10 years or so since the first one came through with at least 2 in every year and sometimes up to 6 or 7 in a grade.

Interestingly it seemed to have been falling out of favour with only 3 in Kindergarten this year.

 

[Andr19]

All this fuss about titles now or later, who knows. Remember that except Edward the VII it was never the then expected heir to take the next reign but the second son, or niece or..... and before that too, take a look at Victoria.
Who knows what will happen until probably William or ? will take over...

 

[fandesacs2003]

I have a stupid question. Will Archie be the official name? Or baby will be baptized Archibald and called Archie?

 

[Elenath]

I have a stupid question. Will Archie be the official name? Or baby will be baptized Archibald and called Archie?

No one said anything other than Archie Harrison, so in my understanding that is his full name.

 

[XeniaCasaraghi]

Archie is a cute baby for sure. But I was surprised by the name too. I suppose I thought there would be at least one traditional name in there.

Sorry but I really don't like Archie, in general, and also because it does sound like a kids' name rather than an adult name.

Harrison was a clever idea though! Especially since most of the Harrison's out there these days really aren't "Harry's son," this was a pretty creative idea.

Someone on Twitter pointed out that Archer would have been a better name. Honestly there are dozens of names better than Archie, honestly no royal name has been this disappointing, at least not for this family.

 

[Elenath]

Someone on Twitter pointed out that Archer would have been a better name. Honestly there are dozens of names better than Archie, honestly no royal name has been this disappointing, at least not for this family.

Well that depends on what you consider dissapointing. I thought William and Kate's childerens names were a tad bland, though I like Charlotte more than George and Louis. To me Archie is a lot more personal, but I understand it's not really seen as regal. As far as names are concerned none are really my taste and that's fine. People would probably hate the names I would choose.

 

[Pranter]

aHa!!! This just in from a report I read on one of my news feeds. Harry and Meghan *did* honor his late mother, Diana, Princess of Wales in a very sneaky way that won't be picked up by a lot of people.

"The moniker is also a tribute to the 34-year-old duke’s late mother, Princess Diana, as one of her ancestors was Archibald Campbell, 9th Earl of Argyll, from Scotland."

Take from it what you will. I usually don't buy into royal stories from my news feeds here in the States.

https://www.aol.com/article/lifesty...iker-is-a-tribute-to-princess-diana/23723328/

The future Lord Femroy (he's currently 11) is named Archie. Relative of Harry's...and there's at least one more current relative named Archie.


LaRae